News:

"There is a terrible desperation to the increasingly pathetic rationalizations from the climate denial camp. This comes as no surprise if you take the long view; every single undone paradigm in history has died kicking and screaming, and our current petroleum paradigm 🐉🦕🦖 is no different. The trick here is trying to figure out how we all make it to the new ⚡ paradigm without dying ☠️ right along with the old one, kicking, screaming or otherwise." - William Rivers Pitt

Toyota's website states: "Let's face it: there's only one planet Earth. That's why we focus on environmentally sustainable solutions in everything we do and every vehicle we make." The company touts its Environmental Challenge 2050 goals of achieving zero or near-zero air pollution emissions from its vehicles, production and disposal processes, and facilities."

By contrast, in his first year at the helm of the EPA, Pruitt has reversed, or is seeking to reverse regulations to boost automobile fuel economy standards and other clean air initiatives, as well as rules on clean water, pesticides and toxic chemicals. He's advocated crippling cuts to the agency's budget, ignored career scientists and other experts in favor of political appointees from the industries they now regulate, and replaced independent scientific advisors with consultants whose work has been funded by big polluters.

The Trump administration just announced plans to vastly expand offshore drilling by leasing all federal waters in the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic oceans. Burning the fossil fuels in these areas would contribute 49.5 gigatons of carbon dioxide pollution, the equivalent of the emissions from 10.6 billion cars driven for a year, according to an analysis by the Center for Biological Diversity.

The unprecedented proposal seeks to offer oil leases off every single coast, even areas that have been long-protected from drilling. I’m horrified by the prospect of more drilling rigs and oil spills off the California coast where I surf and play with my kids.

Yet it isn’t enough for Californians or East Coast residents to oppose Trump’s reckless push to let oil companies drill off our coasts, as important as that is. We must also draw the line further north — in the Arctic.

Trump’s push to open up the Arctic Ocean to offshore drilling is irresponsible and dangerous. The remote, harsh Arctic waters have been largely off limits to oil development for good reason. An oil spill would be impossible to clean up and would imperil endangered polar bears and bowhead whales.

This is about more than just doing the right thing for the communities and wildlife of the Arctic, because Arctic drilling is a carbon bomb that will affect everyone. Expanded Arctic drilling would threaten California and coastal areas around the world. Sea-level rise and ocean warming and acidification will all be worse if Trump allows offshore drilling in the far North. Climate change is a top driver of wildlife extinction, so his plan would also accelerate the current mass extinction crisis.

I plan to do everything I can to prevent Trump from offering the first federal leases off California’s coast in more than 30 years. I know that my friends in Virginia and Florida plan to fight like hell to protect the Atlantic, too, and I want them to succeed.

But even if we win those battles, we’ll still lose the war against climate chaos if the Arctic is spoiled with platforms, pipelines and pollution. We’re being tested, and Trump will conquer us if he can divide us.

The Arctic is warming at twice the global rate, and it’s starting to release massive amounts of carbon contained in the permafrost. Tapping the vast stores of oil under the Chukchi and Beaufort seas would accelerate global warming more than any other decision the president could make.

Coastal cities from San Francisco to New York to Miami are already struggling to prepare for rising seas that even moderate forecasts say will flood critical infrastructure. The worst sea-level scenarios would inundate coastal cities around the world and drive millions of people from their homes.

Arctic drilling would also change the temperature and chemistry of the Pacific and other oceans, affecting marine life and the communities that depend on it. Ocean warming and acidification off California’s coast will change coastal culture as we know it, throwing a wrench in the engine of the world’s sixth-largest economy.

One recent example was the toxic algae outbreak that poisoned sea lions and shellfish in California. Studies show that such outbreaks will be more common and toxic as the ocean warms and acidifies.

But Californians must go beyond just protecting our 1,100-mile coastline from the direct threat posed by offshore drilling and fracking. Indeed, a good sign is that cities across California have called for a robust, united stance opposing leasing not only in the Pacific, but also shunning expansion in the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic in Trump’s new five-year offshore leasing plan.

We must all also use our voices and political power to protect the Arctic.

Aerial view of the Auger Tension Leg Platform in the deep-water US Gulf of Mexico in foreground. Noble Jim Thompson drilling rig in background. Photo credit: Royal Dutch Shell

Will Oil Majors Actually Sink Money Into America’s Waters?

January 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

SNIPPET 1:

It’s not that there aren’t potentially good prospects out there. Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico are obviously well-developed in certain areas already. The waters off southern California are also tempting. Meanwhile, using a little Pangaean jigsaw-puzzling, West Africa’s prolific fields suggest there may be similar riches off the Eastern Seaboard.

And it’s not like major oil companies are brimming with exploration prospects right now. The energy crash crushed spending on discoveries, with 2017 seeing the fewest on record, according to Rystad Energy, a consultancy. Another firm, Wood Mackenzie, estimates just $37 billion will be spent on exploration this year, down more than 60 percent from 2015.

There are two big complications when it comes to capitalizing on America’s federal waters, though: politics and time.

SNIPPET 2:

Offshore spending isn’t dead.Some operators, such as Norway’s Statoil ASA, have worked hard to cut costs and shorten schedules to make projects work at lower prices.

In the Gulf of Mexico, William Turner of Wood Mackenzie authored a recent report forecasting oil and gas production to reach a record of 1.94 million barrels of oil equivalent per day in 2018.

However, he cautions that exploration spending there will remain flat this year and activity will focus on less-ambitious projects, such as those tying back to existing fields and infrastructure. Current energy pricing, and the renewed focus on staying nimble when it comes to deploying capital, are powerful restraints.

And these challenges would be magnified in new, relatively undeveloped areas. Turner points out, for example, that the swiftness of the Gulf Stream, a wide current running parallel to the Eastern Seaboard, could present big challenges to drilling on the Atlantic shelf.

Agelbert NOTE: The problem humanity has is NOT lack of hydrocarbons; it is the adamant and totally unreasonable refusal to accept the FACT that we have ALREADY exceeded the "carbon budget" for a FOUR DEGREE C rise in average global temperature, never mind a TWO DEGREE C "target". We are now on our way to 10 DEGREES C PLUS! The worse scenario the IPCC came up with (BAU RCP-8.5) is too conservative a projection of the heat increase (it is MUCH, MUCH WORSE!).

Anyone telling you that fossil fuels are "running out" needs to read the published figures from the oil and gas producing nations of this planet. The emissions are INCREASING, NOT "leveling off or decreasing". PLUS, tropical rain forests AND permafrost melt are now ADDING to the carbon emissions! GHG is GHG. no matter where it is coming from! You are NOT going to turn this heat engine off easily. Several heat adding feedbacks we have triggered by burning too much fossil fuels are NOT in our control, PERIOD.

Where in God's good earth these fossil fueler wishful thinking FOOLS think that we are somehow going to get a handle on this massive heating NOW IN THE Global Warming radiative forcing INERTIA pipeline, even if we stopped all hydrocarbon burning today (rather than the present tragic reality of increased burning), is a mystery to me. They certainly DO NOT get this idea from empirical evidence or sound science.

This stubborn clinging to a happy talk myth about some "quick recovery from fossil fuel burning caused global warming" is a testament to the extremes people in denial of an extinction threat reality will go to.

And for the propagandist liars that know the truth and push the happy talk for money, I can only say that they are greater fools than those naive folks that believe the fossil fuel fascist funded happy talk lies and distortions. These bought and paid for propagandists are behaving as STUPIDLY as any person possibly can. You STUPID, MONEY LOVING BASTARDS deserve the Darwin Evolutionary Dead End Award.

Aerial view of the Auger Tension Leg Platform in the deep-water US Gulf of Mexico in foreground. Noble Jim Thompson drilling rig in background. Photo credit: Royal Dutch Shell

Will Oil Majors Actually Sink Money Into America’s Waters?

January 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

SNIPPET 1:

It’s not that there aren’t potentially good prospects out there. Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico are obviously well-developed in certain areas already. The waters off southern California are also tempting. Meanwhile, using a little Pangaean jigsaw-puzzling, West Africa’s prolific fields suggest there may be similar riches off the Eastern Seaboard.

And it’s not like major oil companies are brimming with exploration prospects right now. The energy crash crushed spending on discoveries, with 2017 seeing the fewest on record, according to Rystad Energy, a consultancy. Another firm, Wood Mackenzie, estimates just $37 billion will be spent on exploration this year, down more than 60 percent from 2015.

There are two big complications when it comes to capitalizing on America’s federal waters, though: politics and time.

SNIPPET 2:

Offshore spending isn’t dead.Some operators, such as Norway’s Statoil ASA, have worked hard to cut costs and shorten schedules to make projects work at lower prices.

In the Gulf of Mexico, William Turner of Wood Mackenzie authored a recent report forecasting oil and gas production to reach a record of 1.94 million barrels of oil equivalent per day in 2018.

However, he cautions that exploration spending there will remain flat this year and activity will focus on less-ambitious projects, such as those tying back to existing fields and infrastructure. Current energy pricing, and the renewed focus on staying nimble when it comes to deploying capital, are powerful restraints.

And these challenges would be magnified in new, relatively undeveloped areas. Turner points out, for example, that the swiftness of the Gulf Stream, a wide current running parallel to the Eastern Seaboard, could present big challenges to drilling on the Atlantic shelf.

Agelbert NOTE: The problem humanity has is NOT lack of hydrocarbons; it is the adamant and totally unreasonable refusal to accept the FACT that we have ALREADY exceeded the "carbon budget" for a FOUR DEGREE C rise in average global temperature, never mind a TWO DEGREE C "target". We are now on our way to 10 DEGREES C PLUS! The worse scenario the IPCC came up with (BAU RCP-8.5) is too conservative a projection of the heat increase (it is MUCH, MUCH WORSE!).

Anyone telling you that fossil fuels are "running out" needs to read the published figures from the oil and gas producing nations of this planet. The emissions are INCREASING, NOT "leveling off or decreasing". PLUS, tropical rain forests AND permafrost melt are now ADDING to the carbon emissions! GHG is GHG. no matter where it is coming from! You are NOT going to turn this heat engine off easily. Several heat adding feedbacks we have triggered by burning too much fossil fuels are NOT in our control, PERIOD.

Where in God's good earth these fossil fueler wishful thinking FOOLS think that we are somehow going to get a handle on this massive heating NOW IN THE Global Warming radiative forcing INERTIA pipeline, even if we stopped all hydrocarbon burning today (rather than the present tragic reality of increased burning), is a mystery to me. They certainly DO NOT get this idea from empirical evidence or sound science.

This stubborn clinging to a happy talk myth about some "quick recovery from fossil fuel burning caused global warming" is a testament to the extremes people in denial of an extinction threat reality will go to.

And for the propagandist liars that know the truth and push the happy talk for money, I can only say that they are greater fools than those naive folks that believe the fossil fuel fascist funded happy talk lies and distortions. These bought and paid for propagandists are behaving as STUPIDLY as any person possibly can. You STUPID, MONEY LOVING BASTARDS deserve the Darwin Evolutionary Dead End Award.

Unlikely unless the price of Oil goes up substantially. Investment cost is too high, and consumers can't afford the price already. Huge infrastructure build out to do this, they would need to run pipelines from all the offshore drilling rigs. Unlikely to happen in the near term.

RE

Yes, RE. That's what the article made clear. The article also made clear that production of oil and gas is going to the moon. And as to the rig business and the OBVIOUS plan to use said rigs to drill somewhere, already the first one of 2018 was delivered.

World’s Biggest Rig Builder Delivers First Rig of 2018

January 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

SNIPPET:

The world’s largest rig builder, Keppel FELS, has delivered its first rig of 2018 and the first of five jackups that it is building for Borr Drilling.

The jackup rig, SAGA, was delivered by Keppel FELS in Singapore. Keppel FELS is a subsidiary of Keppel Offshore & Marine.

“We are pleased :evil4: to deliver the first rig to our new customer Borr Drilling,” said Mr Chris Ong, CEO of Keppel O&M. “As the drilling market recovers, the quality and capabilities of our KFELS B Class designs would be important differentiators for rig owners seeking efficient and reliable operations. Our rigs have set the industry benchmark and we are confident that this rig will be just as successful when deployed.”

The KFELS Super B Class rigs are designed to operate in 400 feet water depth and drill to 35,000 feet. They are equipped with a two million pound drilling system and a maximum combined cantilever load of 3,700 kips for high horsepower during drilling operation.

RE, they are NOT going to stop drilling until we-the-people MAKE THEM stop drilling. All this talk about what people can "afford" is not going to stop the plans of these bastards. These 5 rigs, of which the first one was just delivered, were ordered in the oil and gas price market levels for the past year, which was actually LOWER than what it is now. It is wishful thinking to think that they won't drill unless state governments stop them.

RE, they are NOT going to stop drilling until we-the-people MAKE THEM stop drilling.

We'll make them stop drilling when we run out of money to buy and burn the gas.

RE

If that is the only way to "make" (i.e. coerce these crooks to stop pollutiing), then we are toast. You always forget that MINOR DETAIL that these bastards are SUBSIDIZED.

When, and if, they actually have to price their product WITHOUT welfare queen subsidies, they will certainly go out of business. But you know God Damned good and well that THAT is NOT going to happen any time soon.

WHERE do you get the idea that the military of the USA, the greatest consumer of fossil fuels in our country, is not going to be able to "afford" to buy fossil fuels? It's NOT GONNA HAPPEN. RE, Even if all the rest of us are doing without due to high prices, the fossil fuel industry will CONTINUE to "profit" through their GOD DAMNED SUBSIDIES and WELFARE QUEEN MILITARY SALES! What part of that do you have difficulty understanding, Godfader?

In a just world, the courts will be the way forward to MAKE (i.e. shut the fossil fuelers down) them stop polluting. Your way will NEVER stop them. Those bastards haven't marketed a profitable product for AT LEAST 30 years! They are STILL THERE because of SUBSIDIES, not because of a "competitive" product.

THE FOLLOWING is a step in the right direction (that Trump and friends will do everything they can to stop - if they succeed, we are all DEAD!).

January 5, 2018

Oregon Court: Banning Fossil Fuel Facilities is Constitutional

An Oregon appeals court ruled that restricting fossil fuel infrastructure is constitutional, overruling a lower appeals court decision. It's an important victory in the fight against climate change, and for local self-determination, says Nicholas Caleb of the Center for Sustainable Economy

U.S. Senators From 12 States Seek Offshore Drilling Exemptions Like Florida’s

January 11, 2018 by Reuters

SNIPPET:

“Just like Florida, our states are unique with vibrant coastal economies,” wrote the 22 senators, who include Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Cory Booker of New Jersey, and Kamala Harris of California. “Providing all of our states with the same exemption from dangerous offshore oil and gas drilling would ensure that vital industries from tourism to recreation to fishing are not needlessly placed in harm’s way,” they wrote.

Interior Department spokeswoman Heather Swift said Zinke intends to meet with every coastal governor affected by the agency’s proposed offshore drilling plan, a process that could take a year.

“Norway’s combined output of oil and gas is expected to hit 4.4 million barrels per day of oil equivalents in 2022, the NPD said, a rise of 10% from the forecast 4 million barrels per day of oil equivalents seen for 2018. Investments, excluding exploration cost, were expected to rise marginally in 2018 to 122 billion Norwegian crowns ($15.13 billion) and to about 140 billion crowns in each of the years 2019 and 2020, the NPD said.”

So, the “good news” I guess is that Norway will be able to maintain the currently extravagant lifestyle expectations of its population for longer than expected … by continuing to sell fossil crack co caine to the rest of the world.

George Danchev 🦖 • 13 hours agoThere is a crucial difference here, we could have the same Norway exporting oil and gas without doing anything on the renewable front. The reality is that Norway is the only one repurposing big oil and gas money to renewables on per capita basis.

There is another big thing - the Norwegian power grid is 100% renewable... okay 99%... so they are internally almost non-dependant on it, so exporting the crack until there is anyone to buy it and investing the cash wisely is a name of a pretty good game. Norway not exporting the crack literally means someone else will deliver for their share and do nothing on the renewables front. So long live Norway.

Quote

Are Hansen > George Danchev • 13 hours agoI disagree. Being the richest country in the world, I would say Norway has a moral obligation to do what it can afford: to stop further petro exploration, invest heavily in RE internationally, and in RE tech domestically. That wouldn't even affect our extravagant life style for most people here.

Where is the huge research center for wave power? Build a beautiful modern campus, complete with wave tanks and all kinds of laboratories, nice student accommodation with enticing student financing, create a bunch of professorships and get the best people from all over the world.

That would be the logical next step. And with 2000 km of windy Atlantic coasts the potential for wave energy is stupendous.

agelbert > Are Hansen • 22 minutes ago

Yep, and Norway is, despite all their Renewable Energy at home, hurting future generations all over the planet by continuing to extract fossil fuels.

To those in Norway who believe extracting fossil fuels from the earth in order to sell them for profit so somebody can burn them is a good idea:

But it does. As soon as the oil price recovers to profitable levels, demand will fall, and the oil price will collapse to uneconomic levels again. There is no oil company whose share price can withstand that, and so their share price will implode and their ability to borrow will collapse with it. Venezuela (which boasts the world's biggest reserves) cannot borrow due to US blockading them financially, and their slow-motion train wreck is happening right now - it's not pretty, and coming to a state near you, guaranteed.

Of course oilprice.com is facing the same kind of train wreck, but the final paragraph shows they know what will happen.

Will oil demand peak within five years? 15 years? Or not until 2040 or 2050?

The precise date at which oil demand hits a high point and then enters into decline has been the subject of much debate, and a topic that has attracted a lot of interest just in the last few years. Consumption levels in some parts of the world have already begun to stagnate, and more and more automakers have begun to ratchet up their plans for electric vehicles.

But the exact date the world will hit peak demand kind of misses the whole point, argues a new report, which is notable since it is coauthored by BP’s chief economist Spencer Dale, along with Bassam Fattouh, the director of The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

They argue that the focus shouldn’t be on the date at which oil demand peaks, but rather the fact that the peak is coming at all. “The significance of peak oil is that it signals a shift from an age of perceived scarcity to an age of abundance,” they wrote. In other words, oil won’t be on the only game in town when it comes to fueling the global transportation system, which will have far-reaching consequences for oil producers and consumers alike.

The exact date is unknowable, and in any event, the year in which the world does hit peak consumption won’t result in some abrupt “discontinuity of behavior,” the report argues. Demand growth will slow and then decline, but probably won’t fall off a cliff. So, the exact date of peak oil demand is “not particularly interesting.”

Nevertheless, the implications of a looming peak in oil consumption are massive. Without an economic transformation, or at least serious diversification, oil-producing nations that depend on oil revenues for both economic growth and to finance public spending, face an uncertain future.

And slowing demand growth is occurring at a time when supply is less of a concern than it used to be, in large part because new drilling technologies have led to a wave of supply from shale. “The world isn’t going to run out of oil. Rather, it seems increasingly likely that significant amounts of recoverable oil will never be extracted,” the authors wrote.

One of the more intriguing conclusions from the report is that this new “age of abundance” could alter behavior from oil producers. In the past, some countries (notably OPEC members) restrained output, husbanding resources for the future, betting that scarcity would increase the value of their holdings over time. “A high reserves-to-production ratio — implying a country could continue producing oil at the same rate for 80, 90, 100+ years — was a sign of both strength and intergenerational fairness,” the report said.

However, looking forward, if a peak in demand looms just over the horizon, oil producers could rush to maximize their production in order to get as much value for their reserves while they can. “Better to have money in the bank than oil in the ground.”

To complicate matters further, maximizing production to fight for market share would require hundreds of billions of dollars of investment. For instance, Rystad Energy predicts upstream spending will stand at $510 billion in 2018 (which is sharply lower than in years past). Huge sums will be required even just to maintain current levels of production.

That creates another problem. As the FT notes, extending the life of oil fields, let alone investing in new ones, will require marshalling such large volumes of capital, but that might be met with skepticism from wary investors when demand begins to peak. “When that shift occurs, from a growing industry to one in decline, you change investors’ perception,” Jason Bordoff at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, told the FT. It will be difficult to attract investment to a shrinking industry, particularly if margins continued to get squeezed. In In that sense, the timing of peak oil demand does in fact matter.

Either way, peak demand should be an alarming prospect for OPEC, Russia, the oil majors — basically any and all oil producers who will find themselves fighting more aggressively for a shrinking pie. “Faced with the possibility that significant amounts of recoverable oil may never be extracted, low-cost producers have a strong incentive to use their comparative advantage to squeeze out high-cost producers and gain market share — just as with any other competitive market,” Dale and Fattouh wrote.

Oil producers will need to adapt to a “higher volume, lower price” environment. For consumers, however, the shift will bring benefits, including more options and cheaper energy.

At the country level, this is scary stuff. Many oil producers have hefty spending requirements to satisfy their populaces, including for healthcare, housing, employment, etc. Ample global oil supply for the foreseeable future, combined with an eventual peak in demand, threatens persistent fiscal deficits and some hard choices.

Saudi Arabia has offered up its Vision 2030, which the report by Dale and Fattouh say is probably “the most prominent example of a major oil producer responding to the changing environment,” but economic transformations are incredibly difficult and would conceivably take decades to pull off.It’s hard to imagine countries that depend on oil for more than 90 percent of their export revenue adapting well — it’s a slow-motion train wreck. Dale and Fattouh say it may require “an eventual adjustment in living standards,” which is a rather diplomatic way of putting it.

To claim the oil majors do not concern themselves with Peak DEMAND is ridiculous. The REASON they buy governments so regulations won't force them to price carbon correctly is to PROTECT DEMAND for fossil fuels. Anyone who knows even a tiny bit about the modus operandi of fossil fuel corporations KNOWS the welfare queen treatment (i.e. subsidies plus free pass on pollution) is sine qua non to their "profitable" business model. THAT is not free. They HAVE TO bribe politicians to keep from going BANKRUPT. And that BANKRUPTCY they sweat will come about EXCLUSIVELY because of a massive drop in DEMAND from CHEAPER Renewable Energy sources. So, they LIE about peak demand "not beng a big deal". It's HUGE DEAL!

“Norway’s combined output of oil and gas is expected to hit 4.4 million barrels per day of oil equivalents in 2022, the NPD said, a rise of 10% from the forecast 4 million barrels per day of oil equivalents seen for 2018. Investments, excluding exploration cost, were expected to rise marginally in 2018 to 122 billion Norwegian crowns ($15.13 billion) and to about 140 billion crowns in each of the years 2019 and 2020, the NPD said.”

So, the “good news” I guess is that Norway will be able to maintain the currently extravagant lifestyle expectations of its population for longer than expected … by continuing to sell fossil crack co caine to the rest of the world.

Aerial view of the Auger Tension Leg Platform in the deep-water US Gulf of Mexico in foreground. Noble Jim Thompson drilling rig in background. Photo credit: Royal Dutch Shell

Will Oil Majors Actually Sink Money Into America’s Waters?

January 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

SNIPPET 1:

It’s not that there aren’t potentially good prospects out there. Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico are obviously well-developed in certain areas already. The waters off southern California are also tempting. Meanwhile, using a little Pangaean jigsaw-puzzling, West Africa’s prolific fields suggest there may be similar riches off the Eastern Seaboard.

And it’s not like major oil companies are brimming with exploration prospects right now. The energy crash crushed spending on discoveries, with 2017 seeing the fewest on record, according to Rystad Energy, a consultancy. Another firm, Wood Mackenzie, estimates just $37 billion will be spent on exploration this year, down more than 60 percent from 2015.

There are two big complications when it comes to capitalizing on America’s federal waters, though: politics and time.

SNIPPET 2:

Offshore spending isn’t dead.Some operators, such as Norway’s Statoil ASA, have worked hard to cut costs and shorten schedules to make projects work at lower prices.

In the Gulf of Mexico, William Turner of Wood Mackenzie authored a recent report forecasting oil and gas production to reach a record of 1.94 million barrels of oil equivalent per day in 2018.

However, he cautions that exploration spending there will remain flat this year and activity will focus on less-ambitious projects, such as those tying back to existing fields and infrastructure. Current energy pricing, and the renewed focus on staying nimble when it comes to deploying capital, are powerful restraints.

And these challenges would be magnified in new, relatively undeveloped areas. Turner points out, for example, that the swiftness of the Gulf Stream, a wide current running parallel to the Eastern Seaboard, could present big challenges to drilling on the Atlantic shelf.

The Christophe de Margerie, the first of 15 icebreaking LNG carriers ordered for the Yamal LNG project to provide transport of LNG year-round in the Arctic, loads its first cargo at the Yamal LNG plant at the Port of Sabetta on the Yamal Peninsula, December 8, 2017. Photo: SCF Group

January 2, 2018 by Bloomberg

By Elena Mazneva and Jake Rudnitsky (Bloomberg) — Russia registered its highest-ever natural gas production last year amid plans to expand into China and boost sales of liquefied natural gas.

The nation’s output of the fuel jumped 7.9 percent to 690.5 billion cubic meters, according to data emailed Tuesday by the Russian Energy Ministry’s CDU-TEK unit. That beat the previous record, set in 2011, by 2.9 percent.

Russia, the world’s largest gas exporter, is working to boost output with plans to increase production of LNG with new plants in an area that stretches from the Baltic region to its Pacific coast. That will put the country up against the biggest producers of the super-chilled fuel, including Qatar, Australia and the U.S. Russia has resources to increase its LNG production almost 10 times by 2035, led by the privately-owned Novatek PJSC in the Arctic, according to the nation’s Energy Ministry.

Don't forget to laugh in any person's face who claims that fossil fuel use is going down (DEMAND is GOING UP, NOT DOWN!). Gallows humor is appropriate at this time of abysmal Russian AND U.S. stupidity. Try again when global warming HELL forces us to stop being STUPID (about ten or fifteen years at the most). By then people that live in jungles will be crispy critters in a toasted arid wasteland.

Putin's Natural Gas BRIDGE to the FUTURE is the SAME "bridge" the frackers in the USA are BUILDING.

By Bloomberg News (Bloomberg) — China’s General Administration of Customs just confirmed what liquefied natural gas industry insiders have been speculating for weeks: There’s a new No. 2 in town.

China imported 38.1 million tons of LNG in 2017, according to customs data released Tuesday. That’s more than the 37.6 million tons that South Korea imported last year, according to customs data that country released last week. In 2016, South Korea imported 33.5 million tons to China’s 26.1 million, according to customs data. Japan, the world’s largest importer, had shipped in 72.3 million tons through the end of November, according to government data.

China’s surge stems from President Xi Jinping’s efforts to clean the air in smoggy cities by replacing coal-burning furnaces with cleaner natural gas. The push resulted in winter gas shortages in parts of the country where infrastructure wasn’t prepared to handle the increased demand. Additional LNG buying has also inflated spot prices, which have more than doubled since June to $11.40 per million British thermal units, according to industry publication World Gas Intelligence.

Gas consumption in China is expected to continue its rise as the government still has room to improve air quality, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. analysts including Neil Beveridge said in a Jan. 18 research note. China could overtake Japan as the world’s No. 1 LNG importer as soon as 2025, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance forecasts.

EPA Admin Scott Pruitt and ranking Dem Tom Carper had a private chat following the fireworks at Tuesday’s Senate hearing, according to a Politico Pro story. Carper reportedly told Pruitt that he would be blocking two of Pruitt’s nominees until Kathleen Hartnett White withdraws from consideration as head of the Council on Environmental Quality.

One of Pruitt’s now-stalled nominees is Holly Greaves as Chief Financial Officer, which is remarkable only in that she doesn’t seem to be directly connected with the fossil fuel industry, like so many other nominees. One of these industry shills happens to be Andrew Wheeler, the other now-blocked nominee who Pruitt wants a his Deputy Administrator. Given that Wheeler lobbied for coal, he and fossil-fuel-friendly Pruitt are two peas in a pod🦕🦖. (And since Wheeler also thought Trump is a bully, clearly he and Pruitt will get along.)

Hopefully, Pruitt’s desire to have a fellow fossil fuel lover at his right hand means he’ll push Trump to rescind Hartnett White’s nomination. Or, with the writing on the wall, hopefully Hartnett White will get the hint and resign.

As we’ve discussed before, Hartnett White could not be further from the ideal choice to advise the White House on the state of the environment. A fresh Daily Beast story published yesterday reiterates some of the many reasons why Carper and dozens of other Senators have been so opposed to her nomination.

In her first committee hearing-- an appearance Carper tells the Daily Beast was “excruciating”--she admitted to not knowing if water expands as it warms . Then there’s the fact that she copied and pasted a bunch of her written answers to committee questions from Scott Pruitt and Bill Wehrum’s answers.

Even before these missteps, she was always a bad choice for CEQ.

First there are all the examples of writing standard denier nonsense like writing that carbon dioxide can’t be pollution because “Our flesh, blood and bones are built of carbon,” and advanced nonsense, like that there is “a historical connection” between fossil fuels and ending slavery.

The fact that the group she currently works for, the Texas Public Policy Foundation is funded by the Kochs and Exxon and Big Tobacco and so many others makes Hartnett White’s crazy denier-fuelled answers a little more explainable.

And with that, there’s no surprise that during her tenure as a commissioner of the Texas Council on Environmental Quality, the agency broke federal EPA rules to hide information about radioactive water from the public. Hartnett White was so brazenly pro-fossil fuels during her tenure at the TCEQ that the Dallas Morning News, a paper in the heart of the oil industry, called her a “apologist for polluters” and wrote her exit from the agency “welcome news.”

Her exit from the national CEQ nomination would also be welcome news. And with Carper’s pressure on Pruitt, she’s certainly in hot water. Just don’t ask her if that water’s expanding…

Agelbert NOTE: Another one of the questions in the "Does a wild bear go poop in the woods?" category.

February 11, 2018

Is the Oil Industry 🐉🦕🦖 Canada's 'Deep State'🦀?

Justin Trudeau and Canada's political elite are fighting for the Tar Sands and oil industry's interests, even if it means Canada misses all of its climate targets. We speak to experts such as Kevin Taft, ex-Liberal Party politician and author of 'Oil's Deep State'

The Fossil Fuelers 🦖 DID THE Clean Energy Inventions suppressing, Climate Trashing, human health depleting CRIME, but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks 🦀, they are trying to AVOID DOING THE TIME or PAYING THE FINE! Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!